Set Domain Mail Hosting

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare idempotentHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the description does not need to argue idempotency. It does add useful context beyond them: that this is a 'pure state change' and that the domain, mailboxes, and their settings are preserved, which is exactly the reassurance an agent needs before flipping hosting off.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences, each earning its place: what it does, how to invoke each direction, and what is preserved. The most important constraint (non-destructive state change) is stated up front.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With an output schema present and annotations covering safety and idempotency, the description only needs to explain the state semantics and preservation behavior, which it does. It could go further by noting whether MX/DNS records must already be in place for enabled=true to actually deliver mail.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented. The description reinforces the enabled semantics with operational framing ('have MXroute handle mail', 'pause mail hosting') but adds no format or edge-case detail beyond the schema, making the baseline 3 appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb and resource ('Enables or disables mail hosting for a domain') and its framing of enabled=false as a pause rather than a deletion implicitly separates it from destructive siblings like delete_domain or delete_email_account. It never names an alternative explicitly, which keeps it just short of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly states the meaning of each parameter value (true = MXroute handles mail, false = pause), which tells the agent how to call it, but gives no guidance on when to choose this tool over delete_domain or create_domain, and no prerequisites such as DNS readiness.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.